User talk:Shudde/Archive 5

Welcome back
Long time no see around here.- gadfium 21:01, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Good to see you back Buddy :)) ..--Stemoc (talk) 05:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Appeal
Sent on behalf of WikiProject Articles for creation using AWB on 20:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Dead link in article 'Frank Hadden'
BlevintronBot (talk) 19:42, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 1
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Zealand national rugby union team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Carter (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:08, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

IRC cloak request
Hello Shudde. You recently applied for a Wikimedia IRC cloak, but it looks like you forgot to register your nickname first. Could you please log on to IRC and do:

where is a password of your choice and is your e-mail address? After you do that, please follow the instructions that are e-mailed to you to confirm your e-mail address. When you're done with that, I just need you to confirm your cloak request:

After you finish all of that, I'd be happy to get you a cloak. :-) If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. -- Filip  ( § ) 23:25, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Thomas Ellison
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Carte Goodwin
Shudde, I disagree with your decision for immediately fail Carte Goodwin, and insist you change your decision and actually allow me some time to improve it based on your suggestions. It meets no quick-fail criteria, and it deserves an appropriate amount of time to be improved like any other GA candidate. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 04:46, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Also in your suggestions, you say "You never say who appointed Goodwin to the Senate seat? I'm assuming it was Manchin." In the very first sentence of the Senate section "On July 16, 2010, Manchin appointed Goodwin to the U.S. Senate seat," so I don't mean to be rude, but I don't feel you spent an appropriate amount of time on this article. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 04:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I spent a lot of time on the article — the fact that there is an error there does not prove otherwise. I read the article before deciding to review it, and then another 30 minutes going through the article once I decided to give it a review. It was about 500-600 words of prose (excluding the lead); which just doesn't take as long to review as an article of greater length. The article did not meet the quick-fail criteria, but that doesn't mean it meets the WP:GACR! Also please keep in mind that WP:GAN is not a substitute for a peer review; it is not about submitting an article for review that clearly doesn't meet the criteria, having someone then spend the time saying why, and then giving the submitter time to bring the article up to standard. I don't think the article was broad enough (among other less significant problems), and that sufficient expansion of the article is not practical in seven days. Remember, that once it has been expanded, I have to review it again like a new review — it's not a trivial change to the article we're discussing here. You're welcome to submit the article to WP:GAR, but unless you think the article is actually broad in coverage, you may be better to spend your time expanding it, fix the problems I mentioned, then resubmit it to WP:GAN. - Shudde  talk 05:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * While the article may not be the longest, I feel you're overestimating his political career. Even so, I can expand this article and address every comment you made well within 7 days. As for GACR, it does meet 3b, so I believe it at least deserves a review rather than a rubber-stamp fail. And although you're correct GAN isn't a place to submit non-quality articles, I disagree with you that this one is one of them. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 00:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I am repeating myself here, but I did a full review — please stop saying otherwise; it was not a "rubber-stamp fail". It was reviewed fully and I believe it fails criteria 3, and that the problems are substantial, not a case of the article being 90% there and only having a few things to fix. To quote Reviewing good articles — "If the problems are substantial or extensive, the nomination can be failed. In the latter case, the editors at the article should be invited to renominate the article once it has been improved". This is what I have done. Like I said above, if you believe the article meets the Good Article Criteria, then take it to WP:GAR. That is the mechanism that the community has in place to resolve a disagreement like this. - Shudde  talk 08:10, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:
 * Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
 * Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
 * Protection policy, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

INeverCry  21:54, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

 * Cheers! Reviews can be quite rewarding when the nominator and reviewer see the process as collaborative, which it should be, rather than adversarial. Congratulations again. - Shudde  talk 00:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrolled
Hi Shudde, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! INeverCry  19:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Patrick Keogh
Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Page numbers and DOI added per your recommendations. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  09:53, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * (Sorry if that came across as a "why haven't you reviewed this yet!?" demand - I only noticed the page numbers had been added (and the article expanded again) a few minutes earlier myself, and though I'd let you know just in case you hadn't seen it. I realise now that it sounded a bit petulant; not the intended effect at all, I assure you! Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  10:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC))
 * Don't apologise! I had intended to check the DYK page asap, but how was anyone to know? - Shudde  talk 10:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tom French Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Passchendaele (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 19:19, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

1888–1889 New Zealand Native football team
Hope you find the cites acceptable, the Aukland Star report probably gives us enough to write up a report on the match, a game which historically seems to be clouded in mystery. Cheers FruitMonkey (talk) 12:50, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Tom French Cup
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

1920 Rock Island season
Hey, I'm sorry I haven't been active. My uncle passed away earlier in the week, so I took a break from editing. I can restart the process now. —Michael Jester (talk &#183; contribs) 05:55, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. No problem, I was a couple of days away from closing it, but if you're back editing then I'll leave it on hold. Would be good if we could get it done relatively promptly. It might be a good idea to add a note to the GA review page so that any readers see that you are back. Sorry to hear about your Uncle. - Shudde  talk 06:49, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of 1888–1889 New Zealand Native football team matches, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Māori (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 02:03, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Carolina Panthers/GA1
Hey, thanks for taking this on and doing a comprehensive review. I've replied to all of your concerns and comments - most have been dealt with, but I have given a couple comments as well.  Toa   Nidhiki05  21:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've responded to the new comments.  Toa   Nidhiki05  17:30, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Please see Talk:No worries/GA2
Please see Talk:No worries/GA2.

I respectfully ask that you please reevaluate your position here.

I've done a good deal of research on this article.

It does provide a worldview.

It is drawn from multiple different secondary sources, the majority of which are not from Australia itself, but are independent reliable secondary sources.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter,

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:02, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool. I've read your comments and replied at the discussion page. Not sure why you are mentioning the use of secondary sources, this was never a problem, rather it was a broadness/POV issue (rather than any probs regarding RS or OR). Anyway hope you're satisfied with my response. I wasn't aware that you (the original nominator) hadn't been notified about the GAR, otherwise I would have let you know myself! - Shudde  talk 11:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:11, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

"I still think it would be nice to have something in there about how common the expression is in New Zealand"
Do you know of any reliable and verifiable secondary sources that confirm this assertion? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:11, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I probably should have phrased it more carefully, but what I was saying is that some statement on the terms use (ie frequency) in NZ would be nice—I believe it is common, but am happy for a statement saying otherwise, as long as there is something on how common or not the term is! As there is a reference regarding its migration to NZ, I was hoping that ref's "Cryer 2006, p. 139" or "Hoffmann 2009, pp. 119–121" may say something, even if only that the term is used 'commonly', 'frequently', 'rarely', 'occasionally' etc. Maybe will help—I don't have access to it unfortunately.  may be useful, but it's obviously intended for international students and I'm not sure how reliable it is. Even less reliable is . Anyway hope those are useful. -  Shudde  talk 09:24, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

List of Kings Island attractions FLC
I have addressed all the issues you mentioned on the review page.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 00:42, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I've addressed the other two issues.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 23:22, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Done.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

You already know what I'm going to say. ;) -- Dom497 ( talk ) 18:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I promise this will be the last message I will leave you. On the review page, you left one comment out of the "resolved comments" box. I don't know if this was an error by you or you think that it hasn't been addressed, but I did fix it as Rambling Man mentioned the same thing in his review.-- Dom497 ( talk ) 19:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I know-I left it there so it is clear I support. - Shudde  talk 12:03, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Ellison FAC
I wasn't sure if you had finished responding at the FAC. If you ping me when you are ready, I'll have another look. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Changes looking good. If I get chance, I'll have another close look this week and maybe a little copy-editing myself. But I think we're getting there. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:07, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Peer review/John Neulinger/archive1
I just wanted to thank you for your excellent peer review. I'm going to try and get started on it this week. Viriditas (talk) 01:34, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
 * No problems. I'm glad it was helpful. - Shudde  talk 12:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * It was. I'm just starting it now. Viriditas (talk) 04:06, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=554726576 your edit] to Matt Burke may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

Keith Davis (rugby union)
Can you separate the article into sections please? Thanks, George Ho (talk) 18:19, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why, considering the article is so short (and you were welcome to do this yourself if you thought it would improve it), but ok. - Shudde  talk 11:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Sonny Bill Williams
Hi Shudde. So i am going to add the controversies you removed into the relevant sections of SBW's playing career. Is that what you had in mind?Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, i see what you have done. You added them in the Personal life section. But i think some more detail should be given like his tryst with the ironwoman - which was pretty big news.Suid-Afrikaanse (talk) 01:36, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Keith Davis (rugby union)
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Peer review
Thanks for your useful comments here. I will address them when I have a bit of time. Cheers! JFW &#124; T@lk  22:31, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Recruitment Centre
{||}

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=558741995 your edit] to Waisale Serevi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=562067745 your edit] to List of 1888–89 New Zealand Native football team matches may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 05:27, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
 * } Of their rugby matches, they won 78, lost 23, and drew 6. The team played three internationals: a heavy loss to England

1877 Wimbledon Championship GA review
Hi Shude, just a heads up to let you know that the remaining issues of the 1877 Wimbledon Championship GA review have been addressed. Again thanks for taking the time to review the article.--Wolbo (talk) 05:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for completing the review of the 1877 Wimbledon Championship article and passing it for GA status (only the 10th GA article within the tennis WikiProject). I thought it was a good and thorough review and the points raised have certainly improved the article. It was fun working on it. I'm considering if it might be worthwhile to pursue it further and aim for A class status and finally FA but I'm unfamiliar with that process and unsure if the article would qualify. Any thoughts on that? Cheers, Wolbo. --Wolbo (talk) 21:25, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Request for help with peer review
Hello- I currently have an open peer review for List of Detroit Red Wings seasons that I am hopeful you could take a look at and provide input for. Based on your review at Peer review/Barend Joseph Stokvis/archive1 and your work on such pages as List of 1888–89 New Zealand Native football team matches I think you may be just the person to help me take this article to the next level. Regards, Rejectwater (talk) 16:57, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Modification: I am hopeful you could please take a look at and provide input for. Cheers, Rejectwater (talk) 17:39, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll try and find time to give it a read over this weekend. - Shudde  talk 01:31, 15 June 2013 (UTC)